Scientific Theism
In the May number of our Journal, there appeared a
review of, and some extracts from, “Scientific Theism,”
by Phare Pleigh. [10]
Now, Phare Pleigh evidently means more than “hands
off.” A live lexicographer, given to the Anglo-Saxon
tongue, might add to the above definition the “laying
on of hands,” as well. Whatever his nom de plume
means, an acquaintance with the author justifies one [15]
in the conclusion that he is a power in criticism, a
big protest against injustice; but, the best may be
mistaken.
One of these extracts is the story of the Cheshire Cat,
which “vanished quite slowly, beginning with the end [20]
of the tail, and ending with the grin, which remained
some time after the rest of it had gone.” Was this a witty
or a happy hit at idealism, to illustrate the author's fol-
lowing point?—
“When philosophy becomes fairy-land, in which neither [25]
laws of nature nor the laws of reason hold good, the
attempt of phenomenism to conceive the universe as a
phenomenon without a noumenon may succeed, but not
before; for it is an attempt to conceive a grin without
a cat.” [30]
True idealism is a divine Science, which combines in [1]
logical sequence, nature, reason, and revelation. An
effect without a cause is inconceivable; neither philoso-
phy nor reason attempts to find one; but all should con-
ceive and understand that Spirit cannot become less than [5]
Spirit; hence that the universe of God is spiritual,—even
the ideal world whose cause is the self-created Principle,
with which its ideal or phenomenon must correspond in
quality and quantity.
The fallacy of an unscientific statement is this: that [10]
matter and Spirit are one and eternal; or, that the phe-
nomenon of Spirit is the antipode of Spirit, namely, mat-
ter. Nature declares, throughout the mineral, vegetable,
and animal kingdoms, that the specific nature of all things
is unchanged, and that nature is constituted of and by [15]
Spirit.
Sensuous and material realistic views presuppose that
nature is matter, and that Deity is a finite person con-
taining infinite Mind; and that these opposites, in sup-
positional unity and personality, produce matter,—a [20]
third quality unlike God. Again, that matter is both
cause and effect, but that the effect is antagonistic to its
cause; that death is at war with Life, evil with good,—
and man a rebel against his Maker. This is neither
Science nor theism. According to Holy Writ, it is a [25]
kingdom divided against itself, that shall be brought
to desolation.
The nature of God must change in order to become
matter, or to become both finite and infinite; and matter
must disappear, for Spirit to appear. To the material [30]
sense, everything is matter; but spiritualize human
thought, and our convictions change: for spiritual sense
takes in new views, in which nature becomes Spirit; and [1]
Spirit is God, and God is good. Science unfolds the fact
that Deity was forever Mind, Spirit; that matter never
produced Mind, and vice versa.
The visible universe declares the invisible only by re- [5]
version, as error declares Truth. The testimony of mate-
rial sense in relation to existence is false; for matter can
neither see, hear, nor feel, and mortal mind must change
all its conceptions of life, substance, and intelligence,
before it can reach the immortality of Mind and its ideas. [10]
It is erroneous to accept the evidence of the material
senses whence to reason out God, when it is conceded
that the five personal senses can take no cognizance of
Spirit or of its phenomena. False realistic views sap the
Science of Principle and idea; they make Deity unreal [15]
and inconceivable, either as mind or matter; but Truth
comes to the rescue of reason and immortality, and unfolds
the real nature of God and the universe to the spiri-
ual sense, which beareth witness of things spiritual, and
not material. [20]
To begin with, the notion of Spirit as cause and end,
with matter as its effect, is more ridiculous than the “grin
without a cat;” for a grin expresses the nature of a cat,
and this nature may linger in memory: but matter does
not express the nature of Spirit, and matter's graven [25]
grins are neither eliminated nor retained by Spirit. What
can illustrate Dr. ——'s views better than Pat's echo,
when he said “How do you do?” and echo answered,
“Pretty well, I thank you!”
Dr. —— says: “The recognition of teleology in nature [30]
is necessarily the recognition of purely spiritual personality
in God.”
According to lexicography, teleology is the science of [1]
the final cause of things; and divine Science (and all
Science is divine) neither reveals God in matter, cause
in effect, nor teaches that nature and her laws are the
material universe, or that the personality of infinite Spirit [5]
is finite or material. Jesus said, “Ye do err, not know-
ing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.” Now, what
saith the Scripture? “God is a Spirit: and they that
worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in
truth.” [10]